Bunk

Lead, front-page New York Times headline today: "Huge Decline Seen in Budget Surplus Over Next Decade."

Item from business-section column from today by same writer who wrote today's front-page, lead news article: "Budget projections are bunk."

If budget projections are "bunk," why are they the lead news article in today's New York Times?

Lost in New York: An article in the city section of today's New York Times asserts, "When drivers are frustrated, as they often are when trying to get on the Manhattan Bridge at Essex and Delancey Streets, they can behave dangerously." Indeed, a driver trying to get on the Manhattan Bridge at Essex and Delancey Streets would be frustrated, since those streets are near the entrance to the Williamsburg Bridge, not the Manhattan Bridge. This probably wouldn't happen very "often," however, because anyone familiar with New York City or a map of it would know that it would be a silly thing to try "to get on the Manhattan Bridge at Essex and Delancey Streets."

Partisan Motives: A news article in today's New York Times reports on a dispute over passages borrowed by the author and historian Stephen Ambrose. "Sean Wilentz, a history professor at Princeton who has criticized the methods of some popular historians in an essay in The New Republic, said: 'Haste makes waste. History is a demanding muse, and so the quicker you write the more vulnerable you are.' Mr. Wilentz also suggested, however, that Mr. Barnes, a conservative journalist, may have had partisan motives in unearthing the mistake, since 'The Wild Blue' also documents the valor of the liberal Senator George McGovern."

The Times doesn't give Mr. Barnes a chance to defend himself against Mr. Wilentz's smear of his motives. So let Smartertimes.com just note that Mr. Ambrose and his works have been widely appreciated and celebrated by conservatives, and that Mr. Wilentz, one of Bill Clinton's most ardent defenders and George W. Bush's most loud detractors, isn't exactly beyond being accused of partisan motives himself.

Fireworks: An editorial in today's New York Times argues against a New York state bill that would legalize some fireworks. "Anything that gets minors playing with matches and flammable materials is a bad idea, and sparklers, while benign at a backyard barbecue, can be a serious fire hazard if crowds of people decide to start waving them around at once," the Times says. By this reasoning, the Times ought to favor a statewide ban on campfires, the Boy Scouts, rock-skipping and marshmallow roasting.

receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free smartertimes.com mailing list